Wednesday, July 29, 2009

With permission I here post a copy of an email Greg Sabine of Massachusetts sent to CNN personnel. He is one of the many people who are dismayed at the unwillingness of the manipulated media to report the facts and pursue actual and conclusive evidence regarding Obama's Constitutional eligibility for the Office of President of the United States. Needless to say, I would happily participate in the debate Greg suggests. However, my guess is we'll be safer whistling for a wind than holding our breath waiting for a positive response from CNN. Like the cowardly back-shooters of the Old West, the manipulated media propagandists have no stomach for a fair fight.

To the Following CNN Suppressors of Free Speech:

Jim Walton

Susan Grant

Jon Klein

Rena Golden

David Payne

Mitch Gelman

As a history teacher and civic educator I endeavor to get my students to think logically - with the ultimate goal of discovering the truth. This means that they must be able to read critically, ask penetrating questions and examine facts in an open and non threatening environment. They must be able to both follow the evidence wherever it may lead and acknowledge the truth when it is discovered.

That is the essence of free and open inquiry. And it has for over two centuries separated us from the tyrannical rule so cruelly manifest around the globe.

Until now, sadly. It sickens me to say that you media nazis do not even accord your own Lou Dobbs the same freedoms allowed in my middle-school classroom.

Here is my proposal:

Lou Dobbs will moderate a high publicized, nationally televised, two-hour, commercial-free debate on the monumentally important constitutional issue of Barack Obama's citizenship.

The suggested topic will be, "Proposed. Barack Obama should immediately provide the American public with all the documentation necessary, beginning with his true long-form birth certificate, to prove that he meets the constitutional requirement to hold the office of president of the United States."

The CNN Team will consist of any three individuals you choose.

The Full Disclosure Team will consist of:

Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily

Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes

Attorney Dr. Orly Taitz

No such forum has yet to be conducted on this monumentally important issue. Here is your chance to atone for the incredible constitutional crisis created by your willful suppression of the truth.

28
comments:

I would love to watch that debate. Of course we know that CNN isn't interested in the truth. They are simply interested in ratings. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But perhaps they should just tell people upfront they are more interested in ratings than truth. Oh, that would hurt their ratings, wouldn't it?

Good point. I wonder though, whether in this case they aren't actually more interested in thought control than ratings. The proposed debate would garner viewership from all sides of the political spectrum. Therefore, it would probably get excellent ratings. But CNN is part of the Manipulative Media, and this would run contrary to the MM's effort to control public perception by repressing the public's exposure to people who are demanding the proof the Constitution requires. I think that's why they won't agree to the proposal.Alan Keyes

many people would not even take this debate seriously. people are not lovers of the truth anymore. I'm afraid we've reached the point where multitudes call good evil and evil good that the bible speaks of. nothing can snap these clones out of it until utter destruction comes forth. and out of those multitudes, very few will repent of their sins and acknowledge Yeshua (Jesus Christ) as Lord. The only revival I see is the resurrection of the dead as our Lord will be set to rule the earth for 1000 years with His faithful saints along side Him.

Indeed it would hurt their ratings. The overwhelming tide of conservatives tuning in would make them look bad to their political bosses. The balance would shift out of control for two hours and that is too much for any media cartel to tolerate.

Well, who even cares about CNN? Fox News has more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined and is increasing in popularity with younger viewers. If people are watching the news at all, they're watching Fox.

So this challenge should be directed to Fox, which does care about ratings. Given that their general position on the issue is similar, they deserve to be challenged on this issue as well. The difference is that they might actually be able to scare up some good opponents.

Or not. After all, the Fox News position on Hussein's birth citizenship (and subsequent voluntary renunciations of any U.S. citizenship) is driven by ratings and perceived credibility, not logic or evidence. Ratings and respectability aren't even as high a motive as blind ideological allegiance when it comes to effective debate. Still, with Fox News I would bet they'd find someone who at least doesn't immediately seem like a complete fool. CNN can't do that.

You keep giving them agony Dr. Keyes!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am sick and TIRED of hearing some of these radio hosts saying the 'birthers' are crazy, or living in the past, or mad they did not win (which sounds pretty stupid since this is not a game of dodge ball). One on the "conservative" station even talking bad about Lou Dobbs because he said it needed to be resolved. I would love to slap the man through the radio...

These people are idiots...

I told someone I would get some sleep so I am going to bed. I hope and pray that this movement KEEPS gaining momentum and I look forward to seeing someone in the "news" media grow a backbone and have you all speak nationally on the subject.

Fox is "the fair and balanced" news station of the four or so major ones. CNN, MSNBC, and ABC are more Republican. Since this argument is one leaning more towards a liberal view (Meaning, outlandish to the more general public, mind you), Fox would be the best choice for you to work with.

I'm not saying this is a Democratic viewpoint, by far. I'm simply saying that the general american public would automatically dismiss the thought and commit no action of resolution.

I'd like to work with you in any way that I could, Dr. Keyes. Best regards.

I would love to see a debate on Obama's eligibility issue! I believe the media has caused great harm by willfully ignoring this important topic. I also fully support the efforts of Dr. Keyes, and many others like him, who will not let themselves be manipulated by the mainstream media.

And for those of you who think us "birthers" are becoming a laughingstock, answer me this one question: Why is Obama choosing to ignore this issue? Anyone with common sense can easily recognize that Obama is hiding something. It's as simple as adding 2 plus 2.

You've gotta go beyond the Certificate. Question his father's citizenship and thus his eligibility. Why are all his college and other records also covered up? There are TONS of records that won't be released? Why? Don't let them paint you as a crackpot, UFO freak.

You know...I'm a little tired of the whole "UFO conspiracy" comparison. I mean, even if I didn't have pretty solid reasons to believe that extraterrestrial life does exist, it's not like it would be idiotic to accept the fairly high probability that Earth is not unique, among the trillion or so planets in just the Milky Way, in having given rise to intelligent life. I mean, if humans are smart enough to bombard other planets with their probes, what is the basis for believing this would be impossible for some other species out there?

The very best argument against believing in extraterrestrial visitors is that they haven't made open contact with humanity at large. Which depends on the premise that people smart enough to travel interstellar space would necessarily think telling humanity all about themselves would be a good idea. Which I personally think is a stupid premise, but I'll leave it as a matter of opinion.

On the other hand, there is a certain pathetic silliness about bothering to try and do anything about extraterrestrials. I mean...if they can travel interstellar space and don't want to reveal themselves...then it's probably useless to look for them. And you gotta know that if anyone can kill you and make it look like an accident....

This issue is much different than the case of aliens for one simple reason. Those who do not believe in aliens do not have proof that they do not exist. In the case of Barack Obama, the birth certificate is proof that they claim to have, but will not release.

There is not a shred of evidence that life in any form exists now or ever in the past anywhere else than on our planet.

"It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whasoever for believing it to be true."Bertrand Russell

There is also no evidence that "debate" ever settled anything.

The facts speak for themselves. Obama refuses to release his records because they damage him, perhaps even disqualify him from his office.

He has already established that he is a charlatan. I am confident that he is destroying himself and his congenital ultraliberal colleagues. The notion of a challenge is admirable and could be set in motion, but hasn't that altready been done? Hasn't he already proved he is unfit to be President? Hasn't the Supreme Court already proved it is corrupt?

I think we should rely on Oscar Wilde's analysis -

"If you tell the truth you can be certain, sooner or later, to be be found out."

I speak as a convinced determinist. There is nothing that can be done to alter the future.

"EVERYTHING is determined...by forces over which we have no control."Albert Einstein, my emphasis.

Someone once observed that they would get to the bottom of the JFK assasination when the last man involved was dead. I would hope that it did not take that long with respect to BHOs birth certificate and personnal records. Now I am hearing that the state of his alleged place of birth may be setting up news stories in order to justify destroying his original BC. I think Orly Taitz et al should be filing an injunction to make certain that this never happens.

A great idea that needs to be shared with others to gain support and pressure CNN to have the debate. Dobbs as the moderator is ideal but CNN elite will oppose because Dobbs is considered an enemy. Ratings should skyrocket for CNN. Another debate forum is to have it similar to a court where the moderator acts as a judge, PBS had a format where public issues were discussed pro and con.

One fact that cannot be denied is that Barry is trying to hide something, actually many things.

I believe he was not born in the USA, but in Kenya. I suspect he also attended college as a foreign student which is the reason these records are sealed. If he had nothing to hide he would not have his files sealed.

Barry is a black nationalist/communist which was ignored by the mainstream media during the presidential campaign. If the American people knew the facts about black nationalism, most never would have voted for him.

We need to get to the bottom of this problem and producing the requested documents will be the only way to do it. They have had time to counterfeit and create new documentation so maybe it is too late, but we must keep trying to seek the truth.

The televised debate is a great idea. The presentation of the facts and evidence would allow the people to form an educated opinion. Now we have the MSM and the White House telling us we must believe them or we are mentally ill. Obama has not produced any evidence whatsoever. One phony birth document is all they have produced. All other files have been sealed including those in Kenya.

UFO's do exist, my ex-wife and myself personally witnessed two totally illuminated flying craft larger than 747's in South Dakota early August 1990. At first they were stationary, then they began moving. One was following the other and we were within 1/4 mile of them. They were traveling slowly at approximately 30MPH. Then all of a sudden they took off and were completely out of sight within 2 seconds. We have nothing here on earth that can maneuver and travel as fast as these craft did. Our government has evidence of their existence but have sealed the files from public view because they don't think we can handle the truth.

Bill O'Reilly is a LOUD MOUTHED know-it-all ENTERTAINER who gets involved in anything that gives him ratings and secures his paycheck. And I sometimes think that is the ONLY reason he got so involved with the Megan's Laws. He never allows anyone to complete a sentence and really would do good to TALK to himself the entire show.

He is certainly nobody's Allen Keyes...

And for you poor sheep who felt so sorry for us that you had to come up with a sophomoric catch phrase, GUESS WHAT? We feel even more sorry for you all because not only do you believe what you have been herded to believe, but you will also do the same for your children - creating another generation of idiots... BAH, BAH...

WAKE UP!!!

The types of games these people are playing should have been learned through childhood and into adolescence. You all remind me of the people the old folks in the South say don't have sense to come in from the rain...

Another approach is to setup a debate using a community cable channel which are free of charge. Often these programs are distributed around the cable company network thus a larger audience. The tape could also be place on UTube and other venues. If it gets a large audience they Fox, CNN, will notice.

RickK brings up a good point about UFOs, anything that you can't identify which flies is an Unidentified Flying Object. A large number of identifiable airborne objects used to be UFOs, and back when they were UFOs their existence was denied or actively obscured by agencies of the United States government.

Many of these later turn out to be simply weather-related phenomena or other terrestrial but rarely observed entities. But as long as the object remains unidentified, the USAF and NASA would rather you not know about it. This behavior pattern is a matter of proven fact.

In other words, the controversy over UFOs is not whether or not there exist atmospheric phenomena which humanity does not have the knowledge to identify with confidence. Anyone so loutish as to supposed that humans can explain more than a tiny fraction of what happens in the planet's atmosphere isn't worth the arguments they ignore. Nor is it about whether extraterrestrials exist and visit Earth. If they do, there's not much you can do about it even if you happen to see one. The real issue is whether or not you believe that government agencies ever act to suppress information they find inconvenient or embarrassing.

To that address, try clicking on the links in the most recently posted entries on this blog.

Welcome to the tinfoil-hat crowd. Membership isn't a matter of what you happen to believe, but whether or not the government approves of you believing it.

Post a Comment

Be advised that this comment section is moderated in order to assure respect for civil proprieties. Posts that use obscenities, scurrilous epithets or that are gratuitously disrespectful of others will be removed ASAP. If you think a comment offensive in this way, report it in an email to alan@loyaltoliberty.com.

Terry Lakin explains seeking Obama eligibility proof

FEATURED LINK

Support This Site

Friends of Liberty:

The content I share on Loyal To Liberty takes a good deal of time and effort to prepare. It's offered in the hope that it will prove helpful to people trying to think through the challenges of faithful citizenship during this time of deep crisis for the republican form of government in the United States.

The site is, as it were, freeware, but of course its maintenance and efforts like the pursuit of the facts about Obama's eligibility eat up a lot of man-hours. Your donation will help me and those who work with me. So please click the button below and help out to whatever extent you can. No amount is too small. When everyone chips in, the 'widow's mite' is mighty. Thank you and Godspeed.(If you would rather send a check or money order make it out to Alan Keyes and send it to: Alan Keyes, PO Box 83759, Gaithersburg, MD 20883.)

THOUGHTLET-The Enemy of my Enemy is ?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I've never been sure the old maxim made much sense. It gives your enemies rather too much control over the identification of your friends. What's more, it allows people who really aren't your friends to identify themselves as such just by opposing your enemies. Doesn't that make it easier for your enemies to plant agents in your midst with no more effort than it takes to stage a phony brawl?Because they live in such a hostile media environment, conservatives are all too willing to embrace any media voice that seems to take on their left wing opponents. But this means that at critical moments (particularly when it comes to personnel choices) they will be susceptible to information provided by people who have only been fighting with their enemies in order to get into a better position to do in the people whose sincerity, ability and leadership offer conservatives the greatest promise of success.In this regard I have observed that the most important information conservatives can get from Rupert Murdoch's Fox News Channel is silence: the things and people Fox positively ignores. You can be sure someone you know to be conservative is standing firm for what's right when you can't remember the last time you saw or heard anything positive about them on Fox News. Think of all the reporting they've done on the issue of Obama's eligibility for the Presidency.Listen to the silence. Better yet, learn from it.

Visit Me on Facebook

THOUGHTLET "A little thought (that) goes a long way."

During my service as an Ambassador and Assistant Secretary of State under President Reagan, a quiet but constant tug of war went on between the Reagan conservatives and the Bush Republicans, though supposedly all of us were pulling in the same direction.My brief as Assistant Secretary for International Organizations (IO- the bureau that, among other things, keeps track of the goings-on at the United Nations)included implementing Reagan's policy of withholding U.S. contributions to the UN until real management reforms were agreed upon and carried forward.I also got involved with issues that reflected Reagan's principled pro-life stands, and his strong commitment to defend Israel from the Arab inspired lynch mob more or less permanently on call throughout the UN system during those years.

Apparently one of the more polite terms of opprobrium the Bush forces used to pan conservatives like me was that we were excessively "ideological".To tell the truth, I always wore the intended slight as a badge of honor, sinceit signified theirreaction to my consistent efforts to make sure my actions served the ideas and principles Reagan stood for.

Meanwhile whether in or out of power the leftists who control the Democrat party have had no qualms about being "excessively ideological."While the Bush Republicans obligingly kept real conservatives running in place throughout their years of pre-eminence (while sopping them periodically with rhetoric and phony gestures of support), the Democrats looked for ways to promote their agenda of abortion, state atheism, and the erosive destruction of the traditional family (It's the major obstacle to totalitarian government control of the society.)Now that the leftists are surging with confidence, Obama shows no qualms about promoting "excessively ideological" extremists like Chas Freeman and Kathleen Sebelius to positions of controlling authority in the areas where they can do the most harm (from a conservative point of view.)Instead of running in place, they're poised to rush forward, like a good running back exploiting the chink of daylight that signals the way to at least a first down and who knows what more beyond that.

When are conservatives going to wake up and ponder the fact that the acronym for Running In Place is- R.I.P.

Share the Blessings of Liberty

THOUGHTLET

As I consider the reaction to my statement that Obama is a communist, I realize how thoroughly the Obama faction's media claque takes advantage of the ignorance even of those who are supposed to be educated and sophisticated spokespeople for conservative views. In this respect I am somewhat disadvantaged by my relatively small stake in this ignorance when it comes to political theory and ideology. For instance, people tend to associate the term "communist" with the violent takeover of government and society. Yet a thoroughly committed communist like Italy's Antonio Gramsci developed an understanding of the nature of political control, and therefore the path to power over a society, far more sophisticated than Marx's economic determinism. (Or was it in fact a more sophisticated understanding of economics?) It was therefore better suited to understanding and exploiting the "ideological" (i.e., spiritual and moral) vulnerabilities of the opponents of communism. In particular, his theories allowed for far greater use of cultural influences (the news and entertainment media, churches and other religious institutions, movements like "gay rights" that contribute to the destruction of moral institutions like the family, etc.) than some people associate with the term "communism". They helped later leftists to understand, explain and avoid (by learning from and adapting the enemy's tactics) defeats like those that fascism inflicted on mid-twentieth century communism in Italy and elsewhere.Reading Gramsci, one senses that he is looking at the intellectual framework for the Obama faction's secret strategic plan. As Sherlock Holmes knew, there's sometimes no hiding place more secure than one that is in plain sight. Especially in an era when the leftist takeover of education produces fewer and fewer people in each generation who bother to read books, especially the ones without pictures in them. (There's a good summary of Gramsci's thinking at http://www.theory.org.uk/ctr-gram.htm)

THOUGHTLET

Apparently most of the people in Congress who voted on the so-called stimulus package had no time to read it, even superficially. That might seem like fodder for a late night comedy routine, until it occurs to you to wonder who did read it? After all, if the elected representatives of the people are just rubber stamping legislation prepared for them by others, its drafters are the ones dictating the decision. Congress sinks into the role reserved for the People's Congresses in places like North Korea or the now defunct Soviet Union. How quickly the substance of constitutional self-government is being turned into the perfunctory sham characteristic of stolid party dictatorships ruled from the background by a handful of unaccountable little despots.

How many Americans wake up every day longing to live under party dictators, worshiping at the altar of a propagandized personality cult, in a world where party hacks offer the only hope of relief from bureaucratic tyranny? All in exchange for a surfeit of meaningless sex and the license to kill your unwanted offspring.

I used always to think of places under communist yoke as regions languishing under perpetually cloudy skies. Actually though, it wasn't the sun's light it cut off, but the light of true human personality. Would any sane people exchange even the worst risks of life in freedom for such soul stifling banality? Will we?

Liberty Loyalists

Subscribe To Loyal To Liberty

THOUGHTLET

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That's not a thought likely to occur to anyone thinking about the banking system these days. It's broke alright. Insolvency is the word of the day, along with that other word, nationalization. Funny how so many people who think the nation state has effectively ceased to exist when it comes to borders and immigration suddenly rediscover its powers when it's time to take over the banks.

"But Alan," you protest "we badly need a solution." Which, I reply, is not a good reason to accept a bad one. In fact , if things have gotten as bad as they say, maybe we should step back so as to let our thinking leap forward.

True, If it ain't broke, you don't fix it. But if it's really broke, you don't fix it either, you throw it away and replace it with something that works better. Instead of taking the bad logic of a failed centralized banking system to its logical conclusion (total centralization), replace the logic with something more suited to the twenty-first century. The twentieth century was all about bigger, more regulated and extensive organization. The hallmark of the twenty-first is the network, the model work-in-progress of which is the internet. It depends on decentralized, individual units, that reach out and form communities based on direct interaction and mutual assessment, rather than a centrally determined distribution of information (like a central bank's fixing the interest rate.)

If the present banking system is failing- let it fail. That's the first step in preparing the way for the emergence of twenty-first century financial networks. Instead of pretending that bankrupt governments can magically save a bankrupt system, accept the fact that the financial Titanic is sinking. Get people out of it, and use what resources we have to construct and launch the fleet of lifeboats in which they can distance themselves from the vortex it causes as it goes down. What I think we'll discover is that the new system we need will emerge from the resulting fleet, as we use twenty-first century tools to turn it into a floating net that won't be susceptible to the cascading disasters of the obsolete vessel. This deserves longer thought, which I give it in the essay Real Change Step Two: Replacing the Federal Reserve.

Twitter Updates

Twitter Updates

THOUGHTLET

I think it's not an accident that the American founders spoke of the people as a body (that is an organic whole), but the leftist proto-totalitarians that tutor socialists like Obama speak of them as "the masses." A mass is composed of conceptually identical parts, whereas the body is an organic whole in which each part is defined and differentiated by its individual purpose with respect to the whole. Is this why there are so many examples of totalitarian regimes that treat people as if they are mounds of dirt to be shaped and repressed, used or discarded (killed) without respect for their individuality? This totalitarian mentality finds a counterpart in the approach that claims to deal with human affairs scientifically, on the assumption that people are no different than other merely physical things.

Here is an audio compilation of the Thoughtlets I post every now and then. I'm making them available as a podcast at http://loyaltoliberty.podbean.com/. They are also accessible as an audio feed. Visit the site, and spread the word. The little thoughts are now consumable as little soundbites. They could be a great way to introduce Loyal to Liberty to people you know.

THOUGHTLETS (Podcast)

About Your Host

For a long while I have been involved in government, politics and citizen activism. I am Christian, Catholic, Pro-life and pro-liberty. I am sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States, and the republican form of government it establishes. I uphold and seek to preserve the sovereignty of the American people, and to restore respect for the principles set forth in the American Declaration of Independence. In light of those principles, I believe the top priority of our political life is to restore respect for the existence and authority of the Creator, God and to rebuild the moral conscience and character of the American people on the basis of that respect; For God, Liberty and the Constitution.

THOUGHTLET

What signals the difference between a "socialist" and a "communist"? It's the gradual repression of political and civil liberty culminating in the open prosecution and suppression of dissident views. But this suppression cannot come about until a monopoly has been established over access to the seats of government executive and decision making power. The key manifestation of this monopoly is of course some form of party dictatorship.

Aside from all the evidence in his known background, associates, policy preferences and political actions one of the main reasons I make bold to call Obama a communist is his grab for unchecked partisan control over the conduct of the next census. Skillful manipulation of the census could make the decisive contribution to establishing an electorally unchallengeable party monopoly, which would then provide the basis for consolidating party dictatorship. If such dictatorship were not part of their agenda, the Obama faction would leave ultimate oversight of the census process where the Constitution places it, in the hands of the legislative branch. As it clearly is part of their agenda, only ignorance or willful stupidity blinds people to Obama's ambition to establish a better tailored version of Soviet-style government in the U.S.

Of course, there may be another name for what keeps some of the so-called Republicans from speaking out about it. Could it be cowardice?

Copyright Regulations

All material on Loyal To Liberty is copyrighted and you will need to observe these regulations when you plan to distribute or use content from this blog.

Copyright Regulations for Content on Loyal To Liberty

You are free to share, distribute or transmit any work on this blog under the following conditions:

Attribution. You must attribute any content you use to Loyal To Liberty by including a link back to the specific content page. You must not suggest that Loyal To Liberty endorses you or your use of the content on this blog.

Even with attribution, you do not have permission to republish the entire blog post on a website.

Only excerpts of less than 100 words from each blog post may be published on other websites. A link back to the specific blog post must be included.

Noncommercial Usage. You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless authorized to do so by Alan Keyes.

Derivative Works. Within the limits heretofore specified, you may build upon the contents of Loyal To Liberty as long as proper attribution (see above) is made.

If you want to syndicate or distribute the full blog post on your website,permission must be obtained before you do so. For permission, please email alan@loyaltoliberty.com.

THOUGHTLET

Everyone's fussing over whether the Alleged Usurper's stimulus plan will help or hurt the economy. Are they missing the point? Massive taxpayer resources are being pumped into Obama's powerbase. His cohorts grow stronger, while the larger economic impact of the plan makes everyone else weaker. Not much of a recovery plan, but a great strategy for securing power.

Then there are all those Hamas loving Palestinians he's using taxpayer money to bring to the U.S. After 9/11 the Palestinians danced in their streets. This time they won't have far to go to dance on our graves.